Re: Catching overriding methods with wrong signature

From:

Steve Folly <moderatednews@spfweb.co.uk>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Sun, 29 Apr 2007 13:06:30 GMT

Message-ID:

<C25A56E6.605F0%moderatednews@spfweb.co.uk>

On 29/4/07 10:26, in article 463461a3.1835819@news.utanet.at, "Roland
Pibinger" <rpbg123@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 13:52:14 +0200, "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote:

* Roland Pibinger:

What about making the const version private?

It can still be overridden. Access is orthogonal to "overridability".

Ok, at least it would give a compile-time error in the above case
whenever the function is called polymorphically. A better approach is
to change

class Base
{
public:
virtual void Foo() const;
};

to

class Base
{
public:
virtual void Foo() = 0;
};

Now he gets a compile-time error (when Foo() is called on a const Base
object) and a linker error for derived classes that don't implement
the non-const function.

I'm not sure this is better; derived classes don't have to override the
method. But I do want to catch them overriding the method with the wrong
signature.

--
Regards,
Steve

"...which means he created the heaven and the earth... in the DARK! How good
is that?"